Next Up To Ditch Record Label: Madonna
from the quite-a-week dept
It's been quite a bad month for the record labels, huh? Kicked off by Radiohead's ditching record labels in order to embrace the new business models that the record labels insisted were dangerous to the industry. In retrospect, it looks like they were just dangerous to the record labels (gee, who could have predicted that?). The latest huge name to ditch a record label appears to be Madonna, who is apparently signing a huge deal with a concert and merchandise promoter instead for over $100 million. She'll still be putting out albums through the promoter rather than the label. There's no indication if she's going to use this to free up some music, but the point should be pretty clear. The money is in concerts and merchandise -- the stuff that the music makes valuable -- not in the music itself. While EMI's new owners have made some noises that maybe they understand what's going on, there's a good chance that it's way too late for the old labels. They had their chance to embrace fans, new technology and the music itself -- and they spent 8 years suing the fans and the technology instead. It's reached the point that college kids are now organizing to protest the RIAA. It's becoming increasingly clear that the labels weren't helping musicians very much either -- and now it appears to be payback time. This isn't the "fault" of piracy. This is the fault of shortsighted recording industry executives who had every chance to understand the economics at play and instead chose to attack everyone (and there were lots) who pointed out to them where the market was going.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: business models, labels, madonna, music
Companies: warner music group
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
You love it.
It's brilliant to see such names going their own way instead of being led there by record labels. It's the only way it will evey really change.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Booyah!
Keep up the good work.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What about upstarts?
Don't get me wrong, I hate the RIAA and it's tactics, but at the end of the day the record labels do put up the dollars to promote and produce new talent. How is that role going to fit in this new model? Time will tell.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What about upstarts?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What about upstarts?
Another one that might soon break out soon in a big way from this method is Tiger Army.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What about upstarts?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What about upstarts?
Tis quite possible, with many other bands creating their own record labels and being fair and just, they may take in these new bands and do for them what the "Big Labels" did for them, but be fair.
Time will tell, but be it Rock, Country or Pop, most who actually are true artist do it for the music and not only for the money. As optimistic as it may sound, I think the real artist will bring the newbies to light for others to hear.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What about upstarts?
When a popular band goes on tour they take lesser known bands with them. There needs to be some sort of union or group that unknowns join and allows bands to team up to create tours and shows based upon style popularity cost that sort of thing. Now the person in charge of the tour is in charge of discovering new talent
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What about upstarts?
How about Beatallica as an example of this power? They got quite popular even before the lawsuit and they weren't even trying to sell a CD(they were mp3 release only when they began).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What about upstarts?
Umm...you don't come here often, do you? This is the first one of these stories I've seen on here that didn't point out how people had always said 'it'll only work with small bands' and how it has been successful for both.
Look at the recent success of the song 'Groundhog Day' by the band Mayday. I first heard it on the radio actually, liked it, so I looked up the band. All the popularity of that song basically came from Youtube, overnight. Though they do have a record label (an independent one), their success story wouldn't be too hard to pull off without one.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What about upstarts?
Besides, it's not like labels actually supported artists. They basically won't touch you if you don't sell more than 500k records. And that includes really well known acts like Johnny Cash, who couldn't get a label to sign him for years.
Chris.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Artists Can Succeed without Record Labels
Currently the record labels main benefits are their 1) big advances 2) marketing power
And now as the ability to market yourself on a large scale without a huge budget is here, artists do not need that much from major record labels.
Granted, if the artists can't get the loans they need, etc. and do not want to undertake the marketing themselves, I think we may see a big push for artists to sign with Independent record labels OR marketing firms wherein the artists can keep their masters, but still get the support they need.
Everybody wants to be the next Britney Spears, but I think it's fine time artists treated this game like the college athletes of the world -- get your degree, and then try your game in the pros, because if you still own your masters (see the degree analogy), you can continue to support yourself ...and your subsequent huge rockstar family.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Artists Can Succeed without Record Labels
Also - marketing power is important. Yeah, artists liek the Arctic Monkeys or Gnarls Barkley got big on MySpace, but only after MySpace noticed that they could make money off of those artists and MySpace acted as the record label for them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Artists Can Succeed without Record Labels
It is good to finally see a big name ditching the record label though. I truly hope it works out for her, because if it doesn't I think the movement will end with Madonna.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Artists Can Succeed without Record Lab
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Artists Can Succeed without Record Labels
artists liek [sic] the Arctic Monkeys or Gnarls Barkley got big on MySpace, but only after MySpace noticed that they could make money off of those artists and MySpace acted as the record label for them.
EXACTLY!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Artists Can Succeed without Record Labels
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
With what the recording industry pays them - charging 25 cents a song would make them much, much more money.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
When you desert, don't value, and downright abuse
In the 1970's, when the Cassette Tape came out, people were called "tapers". The Grateful Dead embraced the tapers, but set ground rules....they set aside an area for people to tape at concerts, but the people couldn't bootleg or resale. What they created was a fiercely loyal following, that earned them millions in.....CONCERTS AND MERCHANDISE. The Dead was second only to Elvis in Merchandise sales.
Had the labels and RIAA embraced the new technology 7 years ago, bought Napster and made it easier for fans, they would have won a loyal following. Now with their treatment of people and lawsuits, I'll never spend another dime on a cd. I'll do without. My money will never go to a record label again. I used to buy a cd on payday as a "treat", and would gladly have spent the $15/month for a subscription to get whatever songs I wanted vs. $15 for 1 or 2 songs and 12 I didn't want. Whether I like Radioheads music or not, I'm buying their new album to support their spirit and initiative.
There are employees within Universal that download songs AT WORK and strip out all the codes and tags to use for their own purposes. The RIAA is corrupt, greedy, and amazingly short-sighted
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not the end of labels
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
New Artists
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I can't see why a truly talented band wouldn't be able to do pretty much exactly the same (albeit with a slightly higher cost to begin with, what with the cost of hosting their site and MP3s / paying someone to make the website for them). It'll just take a while.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Wanna bet
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Finally..
As consumers I think most of us can agree that we still want the music that artists produce/write/etc... We just want to be able to have the freedom to consume it in a reasonable and economical manner.
The days of the 15 to 20 dollar CD are long gone. Now it's all about digital and MP3 players and convenience. This medium needs to be embraced fully by everyone on both sides and we need to move forward and come up with a strategy that is good for everybody involved.
Essentially -
Reasonable Fair Use Rights for the Consumer
Unencumbered Media (No DRM basically)
Reasonable Pricing
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Steve Albini: The problem with Music
http://www.negativland.com/albini.html
Courtney Love: Courtney Love Does the Math
http://archive.salon.com/tech/feature/2000/06/14/love/print.html
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Upstarts
How does the rank and file musician obtain recordings that people want to listen to? Cost being the biggest factor. All the pie int he sky senerios listed here are NOT better than its current iteration: get a loan? Have another artist sponsor you? Get famous on Youtube? None of these options help the middle-class musician.
Record companies, like em or not, liten to your mediocre recording, sign you to a deal, front you a bunch of cash, put you in front of top notch producers and sound engineers, dress you accordingly so you CAN be marketable. They take all the monitary risk hoping the public will buy the music.
Seems like this new model would create a lot more STARVING musicians, as well as them being bankrupt.
Again, don't get me wrong. The RIAA are a bunch of tards and the music industry should disband the organization for what amounts to extortion. But someone wil need to fill this void or our music choices will be very limited until this new model comes of age.
BTW, I actually come here a lot.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Upstarts
If you're not very good, then get better or die. Leave the creation of music to the real artists who can actually create great music, not the marketeers who create banal, insipid pablum to try and make as much money as possible.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Upstarts
It's real easy to say, "make better music". But the reality is completely oposite.
I want to re-iterate: I am fully against the RIAA and all they stand for, I just want to make sure the colateral damage created by Radiohead's distribution model does not destroy the very people we are trying to empower.
Say it with me: un-intended consiquences.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
So basically, you're arguing that this new business model will get rid of bands/musicians that are only making money because producers are throwing money at them and marketing them, not because they're actually good?
Why exactly is this a bad thing?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Does it? Don't suppose you can actually back that claim up now can you?
Thought not, but you can keep talking out of your rectum and maybe someone will actually listen.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: #36
I'm sorry if it hurts you, but do you honestly accept sympathy for being cut out of the business for your "mediocre recording"s, in your own words? You said yourself that there's 2 or 3 good songs an hour on radio, and the rest is "mediocre," "rank and file." Do you want to contribute to that? Why? Your argument is a perfectly contained oxymoron.
I have already long felt that my music choices were limited, precisely because there's very little worthwhile on the radio. So I have stuck to lesser known acts. I buy their CDs from their websites, directly from the creators. It's great for both of us. I may not get the immediate gratification of walking into a store, but I get just what I want and the middleman is cut out. I love it and they seem to find it a fine business model. Some were on labels before, some were not. And yet, yes, somehow, I still found out about them and became a fan. I know it sounds impossible, but it's not. Some bands also use small distributors to get CDs to stores that have the balls to independently choose what music to carry.
You've got a few choices:
Join the long tail
Become as "good" as Britney Spears, et al, get a deal with Big Five
Play coffeehouses and cafes
Stop making music
If you will continue to insist that mediocre music is a necessity, I'm happy to accuse you (along with big labels) of polluting the cultural landscape.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Music
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Signed artist ditching major lables
[ link to this | view in chronology ]